752 
Editorial. 
Am.  Jour.  Pharm. 
Nov.,  1918. 
tunity  to  perform  a  master  stroke  in  the  interest  of  pharmacy  in 
a  broad  fraternal  and  professional  spirit  has  been  diverted  by 
narrow-mindedness  and  schism  to  serve  as  a  factional  advantage. 
The  professional  ideals,  so  generously  proclaimed,  gave  way  to  the 
tactics  of  the  politician  and  we  have  here  another  example  of  that 
"too  much  self-interest  and  jealousmindedness  among  pharmaceu- 
tical associations  "  that  Dr.  Dohme  criticised  at  Chicago. 
It  is  indisputable  that  some  of  the  most  prominent  schools  of 
pharmacy,  with  established  records  for  their  high  attainments,  were 
deliberately  ignored.  The  fact  that  in  -these  the  facilities,  equip- 
ment, faculties  and  student  bodies  were  superior  and  that  their  cur- 
ricula already  included  the  scientific  subjects  and  higher  pharmacy 
that  was  incorporated  in  this  "  Special  Bulletin  on  Program  in 
Pharmacy  "  received  no  consideration.  We  are  unwilling  to  believe 
that  the  members  of  the  committee  were  ignorant  of  these  facts  and 
so  we  are  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  other  motives  directed  the 
misadvice  to  a  department  of  the  government  at  a  critical  period  in 
the  history  of  the  nation.  The  misadvice  and  misdirection  of  a 
national  movement,  for  a  temporary  factional  advantage,  cannot  be 
construed  as  to  the  best  interests  of  the  nation  or  of  pharmacy. 
The  principle  of  the  "  golden  rule  "  was  cast  aside  and  the  bibli- 
cal injunction  "  by  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them  "  as  well  as  the 
slogan  of  modern  business,  "  deliver  the  goods,"  were  swept  aside 
by  the  perverse  wind  of  jealousy  that  once  again  presented  phar- 
macy with  a  divided  front. 
The  circular  "  press  notice "  issued  on  this  Sunday  conference 
was  addressed  "  To  the  Pharmaceutical  Profession  of  America." 
Just  who  are  to  be  considered  as  constituting  the  "  pharmaceutical 
profession  of  America  "  is  a  question  that  is  reserved  for  further 
discussion.  The  bias  that  has  affected  the  moral  vision  and  judg- 
ment of  some  pharmacists  was  further  shown  by  the  fact  that  the 
American  Journal  of  Pharmacy  was  not  favored  with  a  copy  of 
this  notice,  even  after  the  author's  attention  was  directed  to  this 
omission.  Our  imagination  is  not  so  elastic  that  we  can  conceive  a 
lack  of  acquaintance  with  this  journalistic  advocate  of  pharmacy 
and  likewise  the  editor's  interest  in  the  matters  at  stake,  including 
the  establishment  of  a  pharmaceutical  corps  in  the  United  States 
Army. 
G.  M.  B. 
